Re: "Publisher" -> "Host" and "Namer" (Bearing on UseImpliesConsent)

Le jeudi, 25 sep 2003, à 15:27 America/Montreal, Sandro Hawke a écrit :
> When Eric Miller names himself 
> "http://www.w3.org/People/EM/contact#me",
> the namer is certainly Eric himself, and so is the host.  But if
> w3.org changed hands tomorrow, Eric would no longer be the host.  If

> As for the host, I don't think the host has much "rightness", just a
> lot of marketing muscle.   Might makes right?  :-)

exactly what I was saying in "URI and domain name"
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sw-meaning/2003Sep/0108

I'm worried a lot about any systems which relies on the power of the 
host. It's why I would be in favor of put the host out of the loop 
(urn?) or to have a system ala P2P. Where the content is somewhere not 
dependant on a particular hosts.
The other thing, I'm worried about, is ownership of the concepts. I 
understand the needs for private vocabularies. But we will create again 
a system where people will claim, you can't use this (URI) without 
paying it.

For me, it's a bit like if our language was something with label 
attached.
	wordnet.headache
	cambridge.headache
	But you can't have anymore just headache. wordnet and cambridge are 
the hosts, where they should be only the namer.

> Fortunately, in practice, the namer and host will often be well
> aligned.

Too optimistic and not for a long term. DNS, SMTP, etc show systems 
that were done for the good and have been used for the bad or the ugly. 
And it's not finished. We are only at the start :(

> Operationally, I might codify this as: one MUST NOT say things using a
> URI term which are known to be logically inconsistent with its first
> use (its introduction); one SHOULD NOT say things which are logically
> inconsistent with how the host uses the term.  (I wonder if saying you
> shouldn't be logically inconsistent with some content is more
> palatable than saying you must assert that content.  I suspect it is
> more palatable, and nearly as useful.)

But if you make the system not dependent from the host you don't need 
to say "should", you don't need to be dictatorial, you just use it.

Received on Thursday, 25 September 2003 22:09:00 UTC